Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster
So when they show up, who are they representing? Where does the assigned message come from? They are not set apart as home teachers, but it is a duty include din the ordination? You don't think that's a distincti9on without a difference (and try telling your bishop that you don't really care about home teaching becasue you weren't set apart)? There are some problems with this reault, IMO, but not based upon the assertion that a HT is not an agent.
|
I'm no lawyer so this is all going to be in layman's understanding and terms, but I'm not sure that they legally represent anyone. Obviously they're coming from the ward, but are they really "agents" of the ward?
When I think of an agent, I think of someone with executive power, someone with the ability to make decisions and direct resources. A bishop, a stake president, maybe even an EQ or RS president, could be considered an agent. But a home teacher is just Joe Member coming over to say hi. If there's a problem or a need, the HTers are powerless to fix it on their own. They cannot leverage any church resources, but can only pass the message up the chain.
If we're going to call HTers agents, then we have to call VTers agents too. In that case, we have roughly a couple million "agents" running around the church, representing the church ... and to each other. What do we call it when HTers teach each other? A shareholder meeting?
I realize that it's not necessarily a legal distinction that will hold up in court, but then again, courts make a lot of really stupid decisions. I can't see how any clear thinking judge can really look at the home teaching program as a series of agents running around representing and acting on behalf of the church. It's just members making social calls.